Combine the power and flexability of Unix-style scripting with the robust security of a Microsoft environment. As long as the millions of less savvy users are all operating within least-privalege account model this should be great.
Actually the last people to muck with the calendar were the Catholic Church, not the Ceasars. The current system of leap days and leap years was adopted by Pope Gregory (as in Gregorian Calendar) sometime in the renaissance. The Orthodox world clung to the Julian calendar leading to things like "Orthodox Easter" in late April/Early may and the "October Revolution" happening in what the rest of the world considered November.
Over 150 years after he wrote it, Beethoven's 9th symphony defined the length of the Red Book audio CD. 72 minutes was not just a number Phillips pulled out of thin air. It's the length of the 9th.
It's not that there arent innovations being made, or work toward innovations being done. It's that the "easy stuff" is behind us. X-ray lithography is harder to do than photo lithography. Making things an order of magnitude more efficient and smaller is harder than just reapplying mass production methods to the latest new thing. Mars is a lot farther away than the Moon, and so on.
Many will do this. There will often be one fee if the photographer will retain the rights and be your exclusive printer, and another higher fee if the job is a work for hire.
The problem arises when clients choose topay the lower rate and then break faith with their photographer by having cheap scans of their proofs blown up.
The law allows for only compensatory damages if you excorcise due dilligence, but opens the door to punative damages if you don't. If you have written permission that doesn't look like an obvious forgery you can get almost anything you want printed. The lab's butt is covered, and the pro you ripped off and the store can both nail you for fraud if need be.
A professional printer will usually be able to spot pro work, although there're plenty of advanced amateurs capable of working at that level also. This is why many pros will have an imprint or watermark somewhere (often on the back) of their prints. Where you get into trouble is when you go to someplace like Wal-Mart where they typically don't know jack trying to make these kinds of evaluations. The "photo technician" at my local drug store doesn't know what Kodachrome is.
Im sure you'd have no shortage of takers if you wanted to hire a full-time+benefits staff photographer to do works for hire for you. Especially since MOST independant shooters make sre having a great year if they make more than a manager at a Quick Trip.
You paid appropriately for those rights I'm sure. There are plenty of shooters willing to work this way these days, but they charge more up-front for their work if they're not expecting any residual income.
The problem is when people who didn't pay for the rights up front try to have their prints (or worse, their proofs) duplicated on the cheap. They are cheating their photographer, and making their photo lab an acomplice.
Re: anniversaries and such-- this isn't a big problem yet, but it will be in the future. The copyright term extensions for photographs weren't as retroactive as for some other media, but that mess is coming in the future.
The sad thing is, current battery technology will run a decent size electric sedan (not a little pod-car) for 120 miles. This is more than enough daily range for millions of Americans, to say nothing os shorter-commuting Europe.
If people would warm up to the idea of a little trailer with a gas generator for the occasional over-the road trip we could have a workable solution for many peoples needs.
To put things in context, I'm one of the specialists in this sort of thing at one of the oldest and most respected photographic suppliers in the midwest.
Shooters who are serious about RAW files don't use Photoshop as their RAW converter. Photoshop may be the number-one image editor, but when you've got 300 RAW files to process it's totally unacceptable for that task. Not only is the output merely good rather than great, Photoshop just isn't engineered for smooth high-volume workflow. If you shoot weddings, catalogs, fashion, or the like; you've got too many files to use Photoshop time-efficiently.
The kind of shooter who needs a D2x will be using something like Capture One. I once used it to convert 300 RAWs under difficult stage lights in two hours. I grouped photos under similar light, fine tuned the converter for one group, set it batch converting the group in the background while I moved on to the next group. This would have taken a loooong time in PS. Once your RAWs (NEFs ORFs CRWs, whatever) have been converted to TIFFs, THEN you move to Photoshop, if necessary.
PhaseOne has already announced that C1Pro 3.7.release.candidate supports the D2x, so I guess the SDK is available to 3rd parties. The overlap of [D2x owners} and {Adobe Camera RAW users} will be a relatively small group.
[Nikon friendly angle] Photoshop's RAW converter is considered by many in the industry to be mediocre. Nikon wants images from their flagship camera to be processed well, reflecting the quality of their product.
[More Realistic Angle] Nikon wants to sell more copies of its Nikon Capture software, which is a superior RAW converter, hands down. $100 for a copy of NC is penuts to a pro, and the savings in their time will be significant.
...and in keeping wih our mission to study "the spread and perfection of democracy around the world... without rushing to judgement about which means will be most affective in producing it;" we have decided to purport that software that shares freedoms with the end users and spreads across economic and national barriers is somehow bad, and that software that restricts freedoms and concentrates wealth and power in the hands of first-world mega-corps is somehow good.
Our next report will reflect on offer new insights on orbital mechanics based on the unprecidented rotations obsrved in Mr. de Tocqueville's grave.
Slashdot Mirror
"Even a stopped clock is right twice a day."
Combine the power and flexability of Unix-style scripting with the robust security of a Microsoft environment. As long as the millions of less savvy users are all operating within least-privalege account model this should be great.
Actually the last people to muck with the calendar were the Catholic Church, not the Ceasars. The current system of leap days and leap years was adopted by Pope Gregory (as in Gregorian Calendar) sometime in the renaissance. The Orthodox world clung to the Julian calendar leading to things like "Orthodox Easter" in late April/Early may and the "October Revolution" happening in what the rest of the world considered November.
Beethoven's allways been bigger than the Beatles.
Hey, come on. If these guys weren't so innovative I'd never have been able to program my Altair in BASIC. That's gotta count for somethin.
GPL==Share and share alike.
LGPL==Share and share alike, but don't be a pain about it.
Use as appropriate.
Michelangelo must be the lead programmer for the HURD.
It's not that there arent innovations being made, or work toward innovations being done. It's that the "easy stuff" is behind us. X-ray lithography is harder to do than photo lithography. Making things an order of magnitude more efficient and smaller is harder than just reapplying mass production methods to the latest new thing. Mars is a lot farther away than the Moon, and so on.
Digital's great, but film has advantages too.
The problem arises when clients choose topay the lower rate and then break faith with their photographer by having cheap scans of their proofs blown up.
A professional printer will usually be able to spot pro work, although there're plenty of advanced amateurs capable of working at that level also. This is why many pros will have an imprint or watermark somewhere (often on the back) of their prints. Where you get into trouble is when you go to someplace like Wal-Mart where they typically don't know jack trying to make these kinds of evaluations. The "photo technician" at my local drug store doesn't know what Kodachrome is.
Im sure you'd have no shortage of takers if you wanted to hire a full-time+benefits staff photographer to do works for hire for you. Especially since MOST independant shooters make sre having a great year if they make more than a manager at a Quick Trip.
If your friend shot them, it should be no problem to get permission in writing to have them duplicated.
The problem is when people who didn't pay for the rights up front try to have their prints (or worse, their proofs) duplicated on the cheap. They are cheating their photographer, and making their photo lab an acomplice.
Re: anniversaries and such-- this isn't a big problem yet, but it will be in the future. The copyright term extensions for photographs weren't as retroactive as for some other media, but that mess is coming in the future.
" Why didn't he just use water cooling? " Because he only gets three bathroom breaks per shift.
Orthodox Jews, 7th day Adventists, and similarly stringent readers od the Old Testament follow this prohibition.
If people would warm up to the idea of a little trailer with a gas generator for the occasional over-the road trip we could have a workable solution for many peoples needs.
Born with a telegraph in his hand...
Next month, softwood lumber import talks will be summarized as follows: "Are too!" "Are Not!"
Shooters who are serious about RAW files don't use Photoshop as their RAW converter. Photoshop may be the number-one image editor, but when you've got 300 RAW files to process it's totally unacceptable for that task. Not only is the output merely good rather than great, Photoshop just isn't engineered for smooth high-volume workflow. If you shoot weddings, catalogs, fashion, or the like; you've got too many files to use Photoshop time-efficiently.
The kind of shooter who needs a D2x will be using something like Capture One. I once used it to convert 300 RAWs under difficult stage lights in two hours. I grouped photos under similar light, fine tuned the converter for one group, set it batch converting the group in the background while I moved on to the next group. This would have taken a loooong time in PS. Once your RAWs (NEFs ORFs CRWs, whatever) have been converted to TIFFs, THEN you move to Photoshop, if necessary.
PhaseOne has already announced that C1Pro 3.7.release.candidate supports the D2x, so I guess the SDK is available to 3rd parties. The overlap of [D2x owners} and {Adobe Camera RAW users} will be a relatively small group.
Photoshop's RAW converter is considered by many in the industry to be mediocre. Nikon wants images from their flagship camera to be processed well, reflecting the quality of their product.
[More Realistic Angle]
Nikon wants to sell more copies of its Nikon Capture software, which is a superior RAW converter, hands down. $100 for a copy of NC is penuts to a pro, and the savings in their time will be significant.
"Hello, Farnsworth, embarassing yourself as usual?"
"Wordstrom!"
I think Bertrand Russel has prior art on this one.
"Help me Steve Wozniak, you're my only hope..."
Our next report will reflect on offer new insights on orbital mechanics based on the unprecidented rotations obsrved in Mr. de Tocqueville's grave.